scholarly journals Clinical Features and Outcomes of 105 Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 in Seattle, Washington

2020 ◽  
Vol 71 (16) ◽  
pp. 2167-2173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick S Buckner ◽  
Denise J McCulloch ◽  
Vidya Atluri ◽  
Michela Blain ◽  
Sarah A McGuffin ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Washington State served as the initial epicenter of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic in the United States. An understanding of the risk factors and clinical outcomes of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may provide guidance for management. Methods All laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases in adults admitted to an academic medical center in Seattle, Washington, between 2 March and 26 March 2020 were included. We evaluated individuals with and without severe disease, defined as admission to the intensive care unit or death. Results One hundred five COVID-19 patients were hospitalized. Thirty-five percent were admitted from a senior home or skilled nursing facility. The median age was 69 years, and half were women. Three or more comorbidities were present in 55% of patients, with hypertension (59%), obesity (47%), cardiovascular disease (38%), and diabetes (33%) being the most prevalent. Most (63%) had symptoms for ≥5 days prior to admission. Only 39% had fever in the first 24 hours, whereas 41% had hypoxia at admission. Seventy-three percent of patients had lymphopenia. Of 50 samples available for additional testing, no viral coinfections were identified. Severe disease occurred in 49%. Eighteen percent of patients were placed on mechanical ventilation, and the overall mortality rate was 33%. Conclusions During the early days of the COVID-19 epidemic in Washington State, the disease had its greatest impact on elderly patients with medical comorbidities. We observed high rates of severe disease and mortality in our hospitalized patients.

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 563-568
Author(s):  
Stephen C. Morris ◽  
Aaron T. Resnick ◽  
Susan A. England ◽  
Susan A. Stern ◽  
Steven H. Mitchell

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S311-S311
Author(s):  
Laura Selby ◽  
Richard Starlin

Abstract Background Healthcare workers have experienced a significant burden of COVID-19 disease. COVID mRNA vaccines have shown great efficacy in prevention of severe disease and hospitalization due to COVID infection, but limited data is available about acquisition of infection and asymptomatic viral shedding. Methods Fully vaccinated healthcare workers at a tertiary-care academic medical center in Omaha Nebraska who reported a household exposure to COVID-19 infection are eligible for a screening program in which they are serially screened with PCR but allowed to work if negative on initial test and asymptomatic. Serial screening by NP swab was completed every 5-7 days, and workers became excluded from work if testing was positive or became symptomatic. Results Of the 94 employees who were fully vaccinated at the time of the household exposure to COVID-19 infection, 78 completed serial testing and were negative. Sixteen were positive on initial or subsequent screening. Vaccine failure rate of 17.0% (16/94). Healthcare workers exposed to household COVID positive contact Conclusion High risk household exposures to COVID-19 infection remains a significant potential source of infections in healthcare workers even after workers are fully vaccinated with COVID mRNA vaccines especially those with contact to positive domestic partners. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S769-S770
Author(s):  
Daniel Stadler

Abstract Reducing Avoidable Facility Transfers (RAFT) is a Dartmouth-developed program that identifies and honors “what matters most” to patients residing in skilled nursing facilities in a value-based, sustainable way. RAFT aims to reduce avoidable facility transfers of older adults from long-term care and post-acute care facilities to emergency departments (ED). Key components of RAFT presently include (1) systematically eliciting goals of care for all skilled nursing facility residents, (2) translating these goals into orders using the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment form, (3) documenting patient wishes about hospitalization, and (4) ensuring that these wishes inform decision-making during acute crises. Data from a pilot program, begun in 2016 with three rural skilled nursing facilities in collaboration with the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center geriatric practice, showed a 35% reduction in monthly ED transfers, a 30.5% reduction in monthly hospitalizations, and a 50.7% reduction in monthly ED and hospitalization-related charges.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joesph R Wiencek ◽  
Carter L Head ◽  
Costi D Sifri ◽  
Andrew S Parsons

Abstract Background The novel severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) originated in December 2019 and has now infected almost 5 million people in the United States. In the spring of 2020, private laboratories and some hospitals began antibody testing despite limited evidence-based guidance. Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients who received SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing from May 14, 2020, to June 15, 2020, at a large academic medical center, 1 of the first in the United States to provide antibody testing capability to individual clinicians in order to identify clinician-described indications for antibody testing compared with current expert-based guidance from the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Results Of 444 individual antibody test results, the 2 most commonly described testing indications, apart from public health epidemiology studies (n = 223), were for patients with a now resolved COVID-19-compatible illness (n = 105) with no previous molecular testing and for asymptomatic patients believed to have had a past exposure to a person with COVID-19-compatible illness (n = 60). The rate of positive SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing among those indications consistent with current IDSA and CDC guidance was 17% compared with 5% (P < .0001) among those indications inconsistent with such guidance. Testing inconsistent with current expert-based guidance accounted for almost half of testing costs. Conclusions Our findings demonstrate a dissociation between clinician-described indications for testing and expert-based guidance and a significantly different rate of positive testing between these 2 groups. Clinical curiosity and patient preference appear to have played a significant role in testing decisions and substantially contributed to testing costs.


Author(s):  
Douglas W. Challener ◽  
Laura E. Breeher ◽  
JoEllen Frain ◽  
Melanie D. Swift ◽  
Pritish K. Tosh ◽  
...  

Abstract: Objective: Presenteeism is an expensive and challenging problem in the healthcare industry. In anticipation of the staffing challenges expected with the COVID-19 pandemic, we examined a decade of payroll data for a healthcare workforce. We aimed to determine the effect of seasonal influenza-like illness (ILI) on absences to support COVID-19 staffing plans. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Large academic medical center in the United States. Participants: Employees of the academic medical center who were on payroll between the years of 2009 and 2019. Methods: Biweekly institutional payroll data was evaluated for unscheduled absences as a marker for acute illness-related work absences. Linear regression models, stratified by payroll status (salaried vs hourly employees) were developed for unscheduled absences as a function of local ILI. Results: Both hours worked and unscheduled absences were significantly related to the community prevalence of influenza-like illness in our cohort. These effects were stronger in hourly employees. Conclusions: Organizations should target their messaging at encouraging salaried staff to stay home when ill.


Author(s):  
Ji Yeon Kim ◽  
Irina K. Kamis ◽  
Balaji Singh ◽  
Shalini Batra ◽  
Roberta H. Dixon ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
pp. 10.1212/CPJ.0000000000000906 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roy E. Strowd ◽  
Lauren Strauss ◽  
Rachel Graham ◽  
Kristen Dodenhoff ◽  
Allysen Schreiber ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTObjective:To describe rapid implementation of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic and assess for disparities in video visit implementation in the Appalachian region of the United States.Methods:A retrospective cohort of consecutive patients seen in the first four weeks of telehealth implementation was identified from the Neurology Ambulatory Practice at a large academic medical center. Telehealth visits defaulted to video and when unable phone-only visits were scheduled. Patients were divided into two groups based on the telehealth visit type: video or phone-only. Clinical variables were collected from the electronic medical record including age, sex, race, insurance status, indication for visit, and rural-urban status. Barriers to scheduling video visits were collected at the time of scheduling. Patient satisfaction was obtained by structured post-visit telephone call.Results:Of 1011 telehealth patient-visits, 44% were video and 56% phone-only. Patients who completed a video visit were younger (39.7 vs 48.4 years, p<0.001), more likely to be female (63% vs 55%, p<0.007), be White or Caucasian (p=0.024), and not have Medicare or Medicaid insurance (p<0.001). The most common barrier to scheduling video visits was technology limitations (46%). While patients from rural and urban communities were equally likely to be scheduled for video visits, patients from rural communities were more likely to consider future telehealth visits (55% vs 42%, p=0.05).Conclusion:Rapid implementation of ambulatory telemedicine defaulting to video visits successfully expanded video telehealth. Emerging disparities were revealed, as older, male, black patients with Medicare or Medicaid insurance were less likely to adopt video visits.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document